The launch of the Supervisory Board of the Defence Procurement Agency (DPA) will contribute to the transparency and efficiency of arms procurement, further implementation of NATO standards, and increased pressure on the illegal arms trade in Ukraine.
This is stated in the Kyiv Independent’s article about the restart of the Defence Procurement Agency.
The head of the agency, Maryna Bezrukova, believes that her main task is to move to direct contracts with arms suppliers. To do this, it is necessary to remove unnecessary intermediaries who resell weapons to the Ministry of Defence at inflated prices. According to Bezrukova, Ukraine has probably lost tens of billions of hryvnias on such contracts.
Last year, before the agency’s top management was replaced, 80% of contracts were received by third parties. Now the situation is changing: in 2024, the share of direct contracts increased to 60%, and Ukrainian companies received more than 70% of funding.
Reforms in the DPA are being resisted by shadowy third-party traders who have profited from defence contracts. Maryna Bezrukova says that after her appointment, she began receiving threatening calls, and her passport details, address and phone number were posted on an anonymous telegram channel. “The only option they have (left) is to destroy my reputation. I think it will be the next step,” she says.
“People fighting against transparency in the system are looking for money, influence, and political weight. We’ve always seen this kind of opposition to the defense procurement,” says Svitlana Musiiaka, Head of Research and Policy at the Independent Anti-Corruption Commission (NAKO).
An independent supervisory board with foreign members can help protect the Defence Procurement Agency. “This will ensure the agency’s oversight and compliance with regulations and the law,” Musiiaka said.
In addition, the appointment of foreign members will help establish direct links with Western suppliers. It will open the market and widen Kyiv’s knowledge of the foreign market, Musiyaka adds. The supervisory board will also help reduce procurement costs from international companies that resell weapons and ammunition.
The selection of candidates for the positions of independent members of the Supervisory Board of the Defense Industry is currently underway. The shortlist includes 12 candidates from six countries: four Ukrainian citizens, two candidates from the United States, the United Kingdom, Poland, one from Germany and one from France. At the same time, the Ministry of Defence refuses to publish the names of the candidates in order to “prevent interference by third parties and pressure on candidates”. Following criticism of the lack of transparency, the ministry agreed to share the names of individual candidates with anti-corruption activists.
According to Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of the Anti Corruption Action Center, only eight of the 12 candidates allegedly agreed to have their names made public. Even with such limited access, the selection process appears questionable, activists say.
Return to NAKO in the media
Intermediaries who profited from defence contracts resist cleansing the arms procurement system
The launch of the Supervisory Board of the Defence Procurement Agency (DPA) will contribute to the transparency and efficiency of arms procurement, further implementation of NATO standards, and increased pressure on the illegal arms trade in Ukraine.
This is stated in the Kyiv Independent’s article about the restart of the Defence Procurement Agency.
The head of the agency, Maryna Bezrukova, believes that her main task is to move to direct contracts with arms suppliers. To do this, it is necessary to remove unnecessary intermediaries who resell weapons to the Ministry of Defence at inflated prices. According to Bezrukova, Ukraine has probably lost tens of billions of hryvnias on such contracts.
Last year, before the agency’s top management was replaced, 80% of contracts were received by third parties. Now the situation is changing: in 2024, the share of direct contracts increased to 60%, and Ukrainian companies received more than 70% of funding.
Reforms in the DPA are being resisted by shadowy third-party traders who have profited from defence contracts. Maryna Bezrukova says that after her appointment, she began receiving threatening calls, and her passport details, address and phone number were posted on an anonymous telegram channel. “The only option they have (left) is to destroy my reputation. I think it will be the next step,” she says.
“People fighting against transparency in the system are looking for money, influence, and political weight. We’ve always seen this kind of opposition to the defense procurement,” says Svitlana Musiiaka, Head of Research and Policy at the Independent Anti-Corruption Commission (NAKO).
An independent supervisory board with foreign members can help protect the Defence Procurement Agency. “This will ensure the agency’s oversight and compliance with regulations and the law,” Musiiaka said.
In addition, the appointment of foreign members will help establish direct links with Western suppliers. It will open the market and widen Kyiv’s knowledge of the foreign market, Musiyaka adds. The supervisory board will also help reduce procurement costs from international companies that resell weapons and ammunition.
The selection of candidates for the positions of independent members of the Supervisory Board of the Defense Industry is currently underway. The shortlist includes 12 candidates from six countries: four Ukrainian citizens, two candidates from the United States, the United Kingdom, Poland, one from Germany and one from France. At the same time, the Ministry of Defence refuses to publish the names of the candidates in order to “prevent interference by third parties and pressure on candidates”. Following criticism of the lack of transparency, the ministry agreed to share the names of individual candidates with anti-corruption activists.
According to Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of the Anti Corruption Action Center, only eight of the 12 candidates allegedly agreed to have their names made public. Even with such limited access, the selection process appears questionable, activists say.